DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
The status of the claims is unchanged since the response filed 12/22/2025. Claims 1 and 10 are currently amended, Claims 2, 3, and 7 are as originally filed, and Claims 4-6, 8, 9, and 11-13 are as previously presented.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al in “International Conference on Applied Energy” in view of Yilmaz et al in Journal of Cleaner Production.
Wang et al in view of Yilmaz et al is applied as discussed in the office action mailed 06/09/2026.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 09/09/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding the rejection of Claims 1-9, applicant argues a skilled artisan would not have been motivated to combine Wang et al with Yilmaz et al or to modify Wang et al. As stated in the previous office action, the entire disclosure of Wang et al is relevant as prior art, so the model teaching a method using pure hydrogen can be cited along with the preferred embodiment for using biomass. Wang et al and Yilmaz et al both teach modeling with pure hydrogen. The trend of Input ΔC is not claimed, just the range of 7% or more. The limitations that “at hydrogen injection temperatures of 600 °C or below, the CO2 reduction effect reaches a maximum” and “at hydrogen injection temperatures above 600 °C, the CO2 reduction effect continues to increase – without decreasing – as the hydrogen injection amount is increased” are not recited in the claim. The limitation “carbon reduction performance would continue to improve with increasing hydrogen injection amounts in the temperature region above 600 °C” is not claimed. Additionally, the amount of pulverized coal is not claimed, only “a carbon consumption.” The examiner notes that the specification states while simulating adiabatic conditions using a test blast furnace level device is performed with a simulation model [0048] and cites using models in [0103-0116].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10-13 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Regarding Claims 10-13, applicant argued in the response filed 05/04/2026 in the paragraph linking pages 5 and 6 what is not taught or suggested by Wang et al. Wang et al teaches a correlation between a gas volume of hydrogen gas with no hydrogen and different amounts of hydrogen and carbon consumption in Fig. 3. Yilmaz et al teaches a relationship between the adiabatic flame temperature and mass of injected PC (pulverized coal) on page 500 in Fig. A.5. However, Yilmaz et al does not suggest obtaining the gas volume-carbon consumption parameter correlation in advance for each flame temperature as claimed.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tima M. McGuthry-Banks whose telephone number is (571)272-2744. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 7:00 am to 3:00 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Keith D. Hendricks can be reached at (571) 272-1401. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
Tima M. McGuthry-Banks
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1733
/Tima M. McGuthry-Banks/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1733
